[160260] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Ashworth)
Sat Feb 2 22:58:11 2013
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 22:57:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMrdfRxVpKtxAYw0JAARkV6sEmWngb9xyHVOtwUJJ6amDVZWoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com>
> Here's the thing, over the time frame your describing you're probably going
> to have to look at more fiber runs just because of growth in areas that you
> didn't build for before. Even if you nail the total growth of homes and
> businesses in your area your chances of getting both the numbers right
> _and_ the locations are pretty slim. Also, you're going to have to replace
> gear no matter where it is core or nodes on a ring. Granted gear that
> lives in a CO can be less expensive but its not that much of a difference
> (~1% of gear costs). Having a ring topology is basically the best way
> we've come up with as of yet to hedge your bets, especially since you
> can extend your ring when you need.
In most cases that's true. My city, however, is built so close to 100%
that I don't think it matters much. Over 2500 units per sqmi.
The problem with gear in the ring isn't cost. It's OAM&P, and upgrades, and
distributed emergency power, and, and, and...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
